The Winter 2009 issue of The American Educator is out, with a cover story by E.D. Hirsch, adapted from his new book The Making of Americans. In the excerpt, he lays out his case that a shared base of common knowledge is essential not just to reading comprehension but the functioning of democracy itself:
A lack of knowledge, both civic and general, is the most significant deficit in most American students’ education. For the most part our students (and teachers) are bright, idealistic, well-meaning and good-natured. Many students and teachers are working harder in school that their counterparts did a decade ago. Yet most students still lack basic information that high school and college teachers once took for granted. This lack of knowledge is is even more important than most people realize….A content-rich core curriculum is the only viable remedy.”
Hirsch also describes how the anti-curriculum movement, the dominant school of thought in education became “tragically and unintentionally” an anti-equality movement.
I’m happy to see E.D. Hirsch getting published. The American Education is an AFT publication, no? Does anyone know if Hirsch is being published in other major education journals? Does the NEA blackball him?
Comment by Ben F — December 19, 2009 @ 6:25 pm
Not sure about who blackballs him, but even Education Next has never asked him to write an article.
Comment by barry garelick — December 20, 2009 @ 9:30 am
I, too, believe there is a degree of irony within Hirsch’s claims. He believes the progressive movement is responsible for movement away from academics. In turn, it has caused a lowering of standards, which has had its greatest impact on minority students.
Whether one adheres to Hirsch’s views or not, he drives at one of our nation’s greatest concerns: the inequity of achievement in education.
We should move to embrace educators who make education relevant to students, while also maintaining high standards for them.
Comment by Mark Karadimos — December 23, 2009 @ 1:26 am
I just finished the article in the latest issue of American Education v33(4). I was impressed with Hirsch’s comments concerning current trends in education. I do not always agree with Hirsch, but I must admit that I was struck by his frankness. He makes some valid points concerning the apparent decline in basic skills and knowledge of our students. While I am not qualified to determine if this is a causal relationship with the progressive movement, it is interesting that the lack of common knowledge he describes coincides with the movement.
As part of the explanation concerning the mile wide and inch deep curriculum currently employed in public education, I would like to offer the following:
Whether we like to admit it or not, there is more information needed to survive our day to day lives now than in years past. One needs to know classic literature, mathematics, and history to be sure. However, individuals need computer skills, social skills, etc to be productive members of society as well. With more knowledge, where is the line drawn? It seems a nationalized curriculum would help with this shared knowledge base, but time must be devoted to individual pursuits, as well. Perhaps a scope and sequence such that time is used for in-depth learning in student selected topics, an offshoot of self-directed learning, would be seen as the best of both worlds.
Comment by Gary — January 7, 2010 @ 3:01 pm
I just finished the article in the latest issue of American Education v33(4). I was impressed with Hirsch’s comments concerning current trends in education. I do not always agree with Hirsch, but I must admit that I was struck by his frankness. He makes some valid points concerning the apparent decline in basic skills and knowledge of our students. While I am not qualified to determine if this is a causal relationship with the progressive movement, it is interesting that the lack of common knowledge he describes coincides with the movement.
As part of the explanation concerning the mile wide and inch deep curriculum currently employed in public education, I would like to offer the following:
Whether we like to admit it or not, there is more information needed to survive our day to day lives now than in years past. One needs to know classic literature, mathematics, and history to be sure. However, individuals need computer skills, social skills, etc to be productive members of society as well. With more knowledge, where is the line drawn? It seems a nationalized curriculum would help with this shared knowledge base, but time must be devoted to individual pursuits, as well. Perhaps a scope and sequence such that time is used for in-depth learning in student selected topics, an offshoot of self-directed learning, would be seen as the best of both worlds.
Comment by Gary — January 7, 2010 @ 3:01 pm